[AlvinofDiaspar]

I agree with Tory's position. We should allow the system to evolve while still maintaining the core principles of what regulation is for in the first place. That being said, the city should decide how and when the system will evolve. They should take no direction what-so-ever from Uber or anyone who supports their service in particular.

Except the problem is that we now have an uneven application of the regulation for what is basically an identical type of service. Allowing the system to evolve is one thing - in the medium/long term I am not sure if that regulation gap is viable.

AoD

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

By the way, if anyone wants to discuss Gardiner East more indepth (and beyond politics), I'd like to invite you to discuss in this thread.

 

[salsa]

Actually, the EA did say that it would cause more traffic and increase commute times, so yes... the part they were going to tear down would have caused traffic...

...for a tiny percentage of drivers. Lets put it into perspective:

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

...for a tiny percentage of drivers. Lets put it into perspective:

Thank you salsa!

3% of users will therefore be directly affected. These graphics also don't capture the living condition it imposes on local residents that live in St. Lawrence, or will live in West Don Lands, Lower Don Lands and East Bayfront.

 

[Tuscani01]

...for a tiny percentage of drivers. Lets put it into perspective:

Yes, but still causing traffic. Traffic affects everyone. Id rather see it above ground, than on a widened Lakeshore Blvd.

 

[CDL.TO]

Gardiner East inbound carries 5,200 people in the peak hour. That's about the same as the projected Eglinton Crosstown LRT pphpd ridership and double Finch West!

3% sounds small, but when we're talking about the number of people headed into the core in the peak hour it's a heck of a lot of people!

(Not that I'm saying we shouldn't get rid of the Gardiner east. Just trying to put things in perspective.)

 

[taal]

wait hmm, those #s don't seem right, what is 'downtown' I'm fairly sure the # of people working in the greater core is much more than 150,000 .. I was pretty sure the path system it self (i.e. all building on top) were even over 200,000.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Actually, the EA did say that it would cause more traffic and increase commute times, so yes... the part they were going to tear down would have caused traffic.

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-67146.pdf

Page 22. Forecast is for five minutes added to car commuting. In exchange, we get access to a huge new waterfront with thousands of inhabitants who will have a shorter commute to their jobs. And, hopefully, a bunch of people who switch to non-car commuting via GO RER from Agincourt, Main, or points east.

And you mean the part they WILL tear down, don't you? Because it's the least cost, most reasonable option and we have a new Mayor who actually prefers 'least cost, most reasonable'?

 

[Tuscani01]

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-67146.pdf

Page 22. Forecast is for five minutes added to car commuting. In exchange, we get access to a huge new waterfront with thousands of inhabitants who will have a shorter commute to their jobs. And, hopefully, a bunch of people who switch to non-car commuting via GO RER from Agincourt, Main, or points east.

And you mean the part they WILL tear down, don't you? Because it's the least cost, most reasonable option and we have a new Mayor who actually prefers 'least cost, most reasonable'?

I'm not against tearing down the Gardiner, especially when alternatives like Smart Track/GO RER are in place. Im also not against the re-alignment of the Gardiner, which would also increase access to parts of the city that are currently underutilized due to lack of access, and spur development. This is why council is now behind the re-alignment alternative. It means not increasing the commute for those who use the Gardiner, not adding more cars to Lakeshore, providing better access to the Unilever site, and freeing up land for development along the waterfront. It's the best option for balancing all users/stakeholders needs.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201..._first_gulf_comes_up_with_new_compromise.html

 

[salsa]

And you mean the part they WILL tear down, don't you? Because it's the least cost, most reasonable option and we have a new Mayor who actually prefers 'least cost, most reasonable'?

You mean the mayor that supports the high cost, less reasonable subway extension in Scarborough?

 

[Videodrome]

Don Peat @reporterdonpeat
I'm told Mayor-elect John Tory met with Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson today at #Toronto City Hall #TOpoli #ottpoli

I like this. No bobblehead nonsense from Tory.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Who will be the "special guest" to introduce John Tory at his inauguration ceremony. Hopefully someone better than Don Cherry at Rob Ford's inauguration.

How about former hockey player, Hazel McCallian? I understand she went into politics in her later life.

 

[freshcutgrass]

I like this. No bobblehead nonsense from Tory.

That works both ways unfortunately.

Be prepared for the most boring mayor in municipal history. Tory is about as fun & creative as a root canal. Miller may have been a Harvard lawyer, but even he did that leather daddy cover of Fab.

On the lack of creative talent angle, does tory's election as mayor mean the province can pull him out off the Ontario Place renewal project, so it may have a chance at getting done? Because with Tory at the helm, nothing creative had a chance in hell of coming to life.

 

[JGHali]

I do think the Twitter association of Tory with Troy McClure makes him kinda more interesting... provided he has some of the same quirks as Troy did:

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

That works both ways unfortunately.

Be prepared for the most boring mayor in municipal history. Tory is about as fun & creative as a root canal. Miller may have been a Harvard lawyer, but even he did that leather daddy cover of Fab.

On the lack of creative talent angle, does tory's election as mayor mean the province can pull him out off the Ontario Place renewal project, so it may have a chance at getting done? Because with Tory at the helm, nothing creative had a chance in hell of coming to life.

I thought the plan for OP had been released and looked pretty good. I'm sure Tory will keep busy with his day job, now, but the two roles might intersect.